An advisory panel split 50/50 on a two-year immunotherapy regimen but voted 7-to-1 for a one-year drug with similar efficacy. This reveals that for adjuvant therapies in non-metastatic cancer, halving the treatment duration and toxicity exposure can decisively shift the risk/benefit calculation in favor of approval.

Even in healthcare systems with universal free access, like the UK's NHS, the actual uptake of immunotherapy for metastatic kidney cancer is only about 60%. This real-world gap strengthens the argument for adjuvant therapy, as it ensures high-risk patients receive potentially life-saving treatment they might otherwise miss upon relapse.

The failure of the concurrent chemo-immuno-radiation approach has not stalled progress. Instead, new clinical trials are actively exploring novel strategies like SBRT boosts, dual checkpoint inhibitors, radiosensitizing nanoparticles, and induction immunotherapy to improve upon the current standard of care.

In adjuvant bladder cancer trials, ctDNA status is both prognostic and predictive. Patients with positive ctDNA after surgery are at high risk of relapse but benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitors. Conversely, ctDNA-negative patients have a lower risk and derive no benefit, making ctDNA a critical tool to avoid unnecessary, toxic therapy.

The InVigor11 study was the first to show that detecting recurrence via a ctDNA test before it's visible on scans is not just a prognostic sign, but an actionable clinical state. Intervening with therapy at this early stage was proven to improve patient outcomes, establishing a new paradigm for cancer surveillance.

An overall survival (OS) benefit in an adjuvant trial may not be meaningful for patients in systems (e.g., the U.S.) with guaranteed access to the same effective immunotherapy upon recurrence. The crucial, unanswered question is whether treating micrometastatic disease is inherently superior to treating macroscopic disease later, a distinction current trial data doesn't clarify.

To combat immunosuppressive "cold" tumors, new trispecific antibodies are emerging. Unlike standard T-cell engagers that only provide the primary CD3 activation signal, these drugs also deliver the crucial co-stimulatory signal (e.g., via CD28), ensuring full T-cell activation in microenvironments where this second signal is naturally absent.

A significant criticism of the pivotal KEYNOTE-564 trial is that only half the patients in the control arm received standard-of-care immunotherapy upon relapse. This lack of subsequent optimal treatment complicates the interpretation of the overall survival benefit, raising questions about its true magnitude.

The failure of the Checkmate 914 adjuvant trial, which used a six-month duration of nivolumab plus ipilimumab, suggests this shorter treatment window may be inadequate. In contrast to positive trials with one year of therapy, this outcome indicates that treatment duration is a critical variable for achieving a disease-free survival benefit in the adjuvant RCC setting.